About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
made without a miranda warning or made while he's not really competent between times when he's sedated and not sedated. so they may be risking their death penalty, but they may be doing it for a good reason. they may need realtime intelligence, but i don't think that the public safety exception will stand up for allowing them not to have given the miranda warnings. >> fascinating. in fact, i have a lot of questions about that i'm going to get to. and actually i want to bring in another colleague as well right now. steve razor is a former military judge advocate general and knows a thing or two about this military issue. typically, steve, we hear about a 48-hour window and this is a very new area of justice. this has only been in sort of parlay for the last couple of years. we are far outside of that 48 hours by today. but can it be extended in the case of public safety? and exactly when can you establish that a public safety exemption has expired or is no longer of concern? how long can you keep him from getting miranda? >> well, there's no hard and fast rule on that. and that's exactl
miranda rights to keep him in a gray area right now whether or not he would be considered an enemy combatant or information that he would be allowing to investigators may not be used against him if he were try to be tried as an american civilian. as i talked there with roger about the fact that congressman peter king over the weekend said the homeland is the battlefield and that times have really changed, what are your thoughts about what the congressman has said about the fbi and that they may have missed red flags and the fact that the homeland is the battlefield? >> as you know, thomas, the fbi conducts thousands of interviews like this. i will say that they do a good job. i would say unless there was some evidence that would lead them to not do something to this individual, i would say they did a good job. i think my colleague, peter king, is not just monday morning quarterbacking but arm chair quarterbacking. we don't no what our investigative authorities know. i would say let them do their job. we can comment but when we start pointing fingers, i think we just add to the conf
. they didn't give a miranda warning so the aclu is shouting about that. and of course, well-known southern bell lindsey graham, why isn't he being treated as an enemy combatant? that one to me -- >> what about benghazi? >> shut up. >> stephanie: i'll always have benghazi. it is my terror. no. >> i would never go thirsty again. i'll have another mint julep thank you. >> stephanie: the legal expert i heard this weekend said this is a nonstarter to treat him as enemy combatants. did he a crime on u.s. soil. >> peter king said this. >> i believe -- should be portrayed as enemy combatants. senator mccain, senator graham, senator ayotte, there are so many questions unanswered so many potential links to terrorism here. the battlefield is now in the united states. i believe he is an enemy combatant. ultimately, he will be tried in a civilian court and the statements taken from him cannot be used against him in that trial. right now, the only links we have as much as chechnyan involvement in the islamic movement. are there other conspirators out there? where do they get the radicalization? >> he so
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3